Miriam Rottmann1, A Burges2, S Mahner2, C Anthuber3, T Beck4, D Grab5, A Schnelzer6, M Kiechle6, D Mayr7, M Pölcher8, G Schubert-Fritschle9, J Engel9. 1. Munich Cancer Registry (MCR) of the Munich Tumour Centre (TZM), Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology (IBE), University Hospital of Munich, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Munich, Germany. rottmann@ibe.med.uni-muenchen.de. 2. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital of Munich, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Munich, Germany. 3. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Klinikum Starnberg, Starnberg, Germany. 4. Department of Gynaecology, RoMed Hospital Rosenheim, Rosenheim, Germany. 5. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Klinikum Harlaching, Munich, Germany. 6. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany. 7. Department of Pathology, University Hospital of Munich, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Munich, Germany. 8. Department of Gynaecology, Red Cross Hospital, Munich, Germany. 9. Munich Cancer Registry (MCR) of the Munich Tumour Centre (TZM), Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology (IBE), University Hospital of Munich, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität (LMU), Munich, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective was to compare the prognostic factors and outcomes among primary ovarian cancer (OC), fallopian tube cancer (FC), and peritoneal cancer (PC) patients in a population-based setting. METHODS: We analysed 5399 OC, 327 FC, and 416 PC patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2014 in the catchment area of the Munich Cancer Registry (meanwhile 4.8 million inhabitants). Tumour site differences were examined by comparing prognostic factors, treatments, the time to progression, and survival. The effect of the tumour site was additionally analysed by a Cox regression model. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis, histology, and FIGO stage significantly differed among the tumour sites (p < 0.001); PC patients were older, more often diagnosed with a serous subtype, and in FIGO stage III or IV. The time to progression and survival significantly differed among the tumour sites. When stratified by FIGO stage, the differences in time to progression disappeared, and the differences in survival considerably weakened. The differences in the multivariate survival analysis showed an almost identical outcome in PC patients (HR 1.07 [0.91-1.25]) and an improved survival of FC patients (HR 0.63 [0.49-0.81]) compared to that of OC patients. CONCLUSION: The comparison of OC, FC, and PC patients in this large-scale population-based study showed differences in the prognostic factors. These differences primarily account for the inferior outcome of PC patients, and for the improved survival of FC compared to OC patients.
PURPOSE: The objective was to compare the prognostic factors and outcomes among primary ovarian cancer (OC), fallopian tube cancer (FC), and peritoneal cancer (PC) patients in a population-based setting. METHODS: We analysed 5399 OC, 327 FC, and 416 PC patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2014 in the catchment area of the Munich Cancer Registry (meanwhile 4.8 million inhabitants). Tumour site differences were examined by comparing prognostic factors, treatments, the time to progression, and survival. The effect of the tumour site was additionally analysed by a Cox regression model. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis, histology, and FIGO stage significantly differed among the tumour sites (p < 0.001); PC patients were older, more often diagnosed with a serous subtype, and in FIGO stage III or IV. The time to progression and survival significantly differed among the tumour sites. When stratified by FIGO stage, the differences in time to progression disappeared, and the differences in survival considerably weakened. The differences in the multivariate survival analysis showed an almost identical outcome in PC patients (HR 1.07 [0.91-1.25]) and an improved survival of FC patients (HR 0.63 [0.49-0.81]) compared to that of OC patients. CONCLUSION: The comparison of OC, FC, and PC patients in this large-scale population-based study showed differences in the prognostic factors. These differences primarily account for the inferior outcome of PC patients, and for the improved survival of FC compared to OC patients.
Authors: A Bamias; M Sotiropoulou; F Zagouri; P Trachana; K Sakellariou; E Kostouros; K Kakoyianni; A Rodolakis; G Vlahos; D Haidopoulos; N Thomakos; A Antsaklis; M A Dimopoulos Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2011-10-31 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: David M Gershenson; Diane C Bodurka; Karen H Lu; Lisa C Nathan; Ljiljana Milojevic; Kwong K Wong; Anais Malpica; Charlotte C Sun Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Olivia Wysong Foley; Dina Winograd; Carolina Andrade; Rachel Marie Clark; Roberto Javier Vargas; Emily Moss Hinchcliff; Katherine McKinley Esselen; Neil Stuart Horowitz; Marcela Guadalupe del Carmen Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-12-13 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Andreas du Bois; Alexander Reuss; Eric Pujade-Lauraine; Philipp Harter; Isabelle Ray-Coquard; Jacobus Pfisterer Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: William E Winter; G Larry Maxwell; Chunqiao Tian; Jay W Carlson; Robert F Ozols; Peter G Rose; Maurie Markman; Deborah K Armstrong; Franco Muggia; William P McGuire Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-08-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jacek P Grabowski; Philipp Harter; Florian Heitz; Eric Pujade-Lauraine; Alexander Reuss; Gunnar Kristensen; Isabelle Ray-Coquard; Julia Heitz; Alexander Traut; Jacobus Pfisterer; Andreas du Bois Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-01-22 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Shaochong Lin; Junpeng Du; Jun Hao; Xiaohua Luo; Han Wu; Huifang Zhang; Xinxin Zhao; Lida Xu; BaoJin Wang Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 3.989
Authors: Merrina Anugraham; Francis Jacob; Arun V Everest-Dass; Andreas Schoetzau; Sheri Nixdorf; Neville F Hacker; Daniel Fink; Viola Heinzelmann-Schwarz; Nicolle H Packer Journal: Mol Oncol Date: 2017-09-29 Impact factor: 6.603
Authors: Francis Jacob; Rosa Lina Marchetti; André B Kind; Kenneth Russell; Andreas Schoetzau; Viola A Heinzelmann-Schwarz Journal: Mol Oncol Date: 2020-10-23 Impact factor: 6.603